medi Posted July 14, 2010 Share Posted July 14, 2010 I am about to start building my new lighting system. So far I am doing 2x250w MH with DIY Lumenarc reflectors. I haven't decided which MH ballast yet. What I am trying to decide is whether to use 4x24" VHO super actinics or 4x24" T5 super actinics for actinic supplementation. I like the size of the T5 because it would give me a little more room to work than the VHO would. Is there any advantage to using VHO over T5? I am limited to a max width of 36" for the entire fixture so I cannot go any larger than 24" bulbs. Also, this whole fixture will be suspended from the ceiling. Thanks for any input. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toxiq Reef Posted July 14, 2010 Share Posted July 14, 2010 Vho is my vote Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+mcallahan Posted July 14, 2010 Share Posted July 14, 2010 I've need nice setups with VHO's and T5's. I ultimately decided to go the VHO route as that's what John_G had on his tank. Talk to Mike_M. He has T'5s as actinics and his tank looks great. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tavio Posted July 14, 2010 Share Posted July 14, 2010 (edited) I would say both. If I'm not mistaken the VHO bulbs i've seen only come 420nm which I think makes tanks too pink. IMO. Edited July 14, 2010 by Tavio Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+mcallahan Posted July 14, 2010 Share Posted July 14, 2010 You can get 420nm or 454nm vhos Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
medi Posted July 14, 2010 Author Share Posted July 14, 2010 The super actinics tend to be 420 and the regular actinics tend to be 454 in VHOs. I guess I should ask why does everyone prefer VHO? VHO setups tend to be more expensive and take up more room than T5. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robb in Austin Posted July 14, 2010 Share Posted July 14, 2010 I was just having this discussion with o0zarakawater and in my limited research discovered that the VHO actinic's look better to people. I never found hard numbers but the prevailing opinion was that the T5 put out more PAR but for pure actinic supplementation the VHO was better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toxiq Reef Posted July 14, 2010 Share Posted July 14, 2010 Mines pure supplementation, I've always had t5 supplements til this new system I put together, and I have to say, once you compare them next to each other vho pops color much more Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caferacermike Posted July 14, 2010 Share Posted July 14, 2010 Medi also consider that your similar length T5 bulbs is only about 1/3 to 1/2 the rated wattage of the same VHO in the same given space. Some of the VHO's are running around 120w of power in a 4' bulb while the same T5 is only about 50w. There are some that claim VHO in T5 but I've not come across anybody that has set them up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timfish Posted July 15, 2010 Share Posted July 15, 2010 Would 39W T5s fit? The fixtures should be about 35" long, they're shorter than 36" VHO's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.